Jump to content

Cyclone

Members
  • Content Count

    72,494
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Cyclone

  • Rank
    Registered User

Personal Information

  • Location
    Wadlsey
  • Interests
    Jiu-Jitsu, Reading
  • Occupation
    Java Developer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. How's that then? More people voted for EU parties than pro brexit... Not that the election was a pseudo referendum anyway.
  2. Those cities are making scrappage schemes available for private cars? On what basis, how do you qualify? I had a quick google and I can find nothing about a scrappage scheme in Manchester. Nor Leeds. London does, but it's business only. https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/scrappage-scheme?cid=scrappage-scheme I wouldn't call £3500 a generous scheme though, when you're talking about people having to "scrap" taxis that are only a few years old and cost north of 20k to buy... More like throwing money away to be honest as the vehicles will be worth far more than that. I know this is specific to the London scheme, but it wouldn't include taxis anyway
  3. Still waiting for you to actually address all the points I've asked you to look at.
  4. I'd guess it's because nobody has ever called it that and common parlance is that the parkway runs to the motorway junction from Park Square roundabout.
  5. Why and how could a scrappage scheme be linked to a single city introducing a clean air zone? A false equivalence if ever I saw one.
  6. It's in the news today. But you don't believe what's written apparently.
  7. I'm asking you to justify this... You keep avoiding it. Waiting for you.
  8. Did you forget what you'd said? If you're asking me to justify why it's legal for (say) a 10 year old kid to cycle, then you're suggesting that it shouldn't be. Perhaps you don't actually think about the implications of what you say at all though, and then you're confused when someone else does... But lets not snipe, instead how about you answer this; Were you hoping to distract with an accusation of strawmanning instead of addressing the actual topic?
  9. Yeah, the bit where they say "we won't do that", whilst they continue doing it. Perhaps you should tell the BBC that they're just rehashing stories though, not me. Did I miss the bit where you said that this wouldn't happen, because the police said it wouldn't. And yet it is doing, did I miss that bit?
  10. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49072302 So this is back in the news today with numerous reports of the police abusing the power and cases being dropped when the phone data is irrelevant. Almost like this was entirely predictable. Did you see the bit in bold Makapaka... A historic case, before people even had mobile phones, dropped because she wouldn't give up her currently mobile phone! So, turns out that I wasn't wrong... And you were. It's even held up cases where the rapist has admitted it. You couldn't even make that one up could you.
  11. What charity? This is a parliamentary study that is finding extensive evidence of people (women) turning to sex work because UC has failed them and left them without any money.
  12. In post #1 you say that 50 - 60 is fine, someone responds to you (and they assume that you are actually joining the discussion, and talking about the 70 mph zone), and you then clarify that you're talking about a bit of road that ISN'T BEING DISCUSSED IN THIS THREAD! If you want to support driving at 50 in the 70 zone, then say that. Then we can tell you that it's inappropriately slow and would cause you to fail your driving test. You even respond directly to Ecconoob, by incorrectly claiming that the limit was set by professionals at 50, when it was actually set at NSL. At least on the bit of road that this entire thread is about and that everyone else is talking about.
  13. 40, 50, I don't really know. Perhaps my kindle history could tell me.
  14. Fair point from Nikki, lets take it back to this. Justify why a license and a minimum age should exist. You can make reference in your response to blaming the victims if you wish. You can also make reference to how someone learns in the first place, children, local quiet streets, parental supervision, and generations past and how they learned. Once you're done there, you can then consider barriers to cycling and how this will reduce take up, you can then continue into thinking about what reduced take up means when it's well established that greater numbers of cyclists mean less danger for cyclists. Finally, you can consider how if licenses reduce take up and thus increase the danger to cyclists, why your suggestion is likely in the long run to result in more danger to cyclists and then try to square that circle.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.